William Daroff and Betsy Berns Korn
As colleges and universities start to open their doors this fall, they face a clear test: Will they enforce their rules, honor their obligations, follow the law and create an environment where every student can learn without harassment or intimidation? For years, North American colleges and universities have increasingly allowed Jewish students to face exclusion and hostility.
This year, administrators must ensure that Jew-hatred has no place on campus.
Last school year, some institutions took action. They trained students and staff on antisemitism, clarified protest rules, strengthened security and promoted dialogue. When enforced, those steps worked. Encampments shrank. Disruptions eased.
Jewish students walked their campuses with greater confidence. Yet too many universities hesitated, and that cannot be an option. Order on campuses must be restored immediately. When student activists praise Hamas and Hezbollah, echo the Iranian regime and call for the destruction of Israel, schools have an obligation to respond.
Academic institutions have a duty to keep students safe by setting clear codes of conduct and enforcing them firmly. Rules against disruption and harassment must be applied evenly, not bent by politics. Online harassment and doxxing against Jews should be treated with the same seriousness as other threats and harassment on campus.
Title VI obligates colleges and universities to protect Jewish students. Compliance must mean more than words: Any institution that tolerates Jew-hatred does not deserve taxpayer dollars. Each school should appoint a coordinator with the authority to investigate complaints and enforce nondiscrimination. When incidents occur, administrators cannot hide behind neutrality; leaders must condemn such behavior, and act quickly and decisively.
Equal access must be guaranteed to all students in all campus spaces and organizations. Jewish students cannot be barred from clubs or programs because they support Israel’s right to exist, and Israeli students and scholars cannot be disinvited or singled out.
Boycotts, whether overt or subtle, have no place in an academic institution.
At UC Berkeley School of Law, student groups amended their bylaws to exclude anyone who identified as a Zionist, shutting Jewish students out of campus life. That is discrimination, plain and simple. At many rallies, chants calling for Israel’s destruction, such as “From the river to the sea,” have become commonplace, creating an atmosphere of intimidation. One student was told she could not take part in a cultural organization because “Zionists are not welcome.”
Campuses must recognize that for most Jews, support for the State of Israel is not a political slogan but an expression of identity. Treating Zionism as illegitimate means treating Jewish identity itself as suspect. Administrators and student-life offices must apply the same clear standards to safeguarding Jewish students as they do for all others.
To that end, organizations and their members who target Jewish students must face consequences. Universities must clearly and broadly communicate their rules regarding protests and harassment, and then enforce them vigorously and consistently. Student and faculty groups, including Students for Justice in Palestine and Faculty for Justice in Palestine, must be held accountable for rule violations, and individual members should face consequences commensurate with their actions, including, as appropriate, expulsion.
Jewish communal life must also be protected. Hillel and Chabad centers are central to Jewish students, providing spiritual guidance, cultural programming and a home away from home. Attacks on these facilities or calls to sever ties with them are not campus politics.
They are hateful, plain and simple. Universities should say so clearly and respond with action. Administrators should also show up for Jewish students not only in times of crisis but at regular events throughout the year — during the High Holidays, on Shabbat, at Holocaust remembrance ceremonies and at Oct. 7 commemorations. Presence itself sends a message of solidarity.
Classrooms must remain places of learning rather than indoctrination. No student should fear retaliation for holding different views from others. The unequal power that professors hold over grades and academic standing makes this responsibility clear.
Canceling classes for protests or imposing political litmus tests distorts the academic mission. Columbia University’s task force exposed repeated harassment of Jewish students and faculty bias that poisoned the climate. Examples like this show why universities must enforce standards and ensure that departments and academic centers reflect intellectual diversity rather than exclude Jewish voices under the guise of academic freedom.
Professors enjoy academic freedom, but they are not free from consequences when they engage in antisemitism. Faculty who harass or intimidate Jewish students must be held accountable, just as students or staff would be held accountable.
Education is essential. Colleges should provide mandatory, recurring training on antisemitism for students, faculty and staff. These programs must explain how antisemitism often disguises itself as anti-Zionism, and where free speech ends and harassment begins. When Jewish students are pressured to renounce Zionism to belong, they are being asked to renounce their identity, that is antisemitism. These programs should draw on the lived experiences of the Jewish community.
Institutions must measure and monitor the climate on their campuses. Schools should conduct regular surveys to gauge how safe Jewish students feel, whether they are willing to report incidents and how complaints are handled. Honest data forces accountability and should drive changes in policy and practice.
Universities must also define the problem. They cannot fight this scourge without naming it. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism, endorsed by dozens of democratic governments and by the United States, provides a clear guide for when rhetoric or conduct crosses into antisemitism.
IHRA is not only about words. It addresses actions, and especially patterns of behavior, that marginalize or intimidate Jewish students. By adopting IHRA, universities can address complaints consistently, transparently and credibly, while enforcing nondiscrimination policies. What happens on campus is not isolated; it is part of a wider ideological assault on Israel and the Jewish people.
These are not optional steps. They are the minimum needed to uphold civil rights, protect students, comply with the law and preserve the integrity of higher education. The Jewish community is united and resolute. We expect action, not excuses, and we will hold accountable each institution that tolerates antisemitism.
Zionism, far from being foreign, reflects the very values of freedom and dignity that define the American story. University administrators must show the same resolve. This school year, each institution faces a choice: allow Jew-hatred and intimidation to define campus life, or lead with clarity and courage. Jew-hatred has no place on campus.
William Daroff is CEO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. Betsy Berns Korn is chair of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.